“Ignore Lecompton, ignore Topeka; treat both those party movements as irregular and void; pass a fair bill—­the one that we framed ourselves when we were acting as a unit; have a fair election—­and you will have peace in the Democratic party, and peace throughout the country, in ninety days.  The people want a fair vote.  They never will be satisfied without it.  They never should be satisfied without a fair vote on their Constitution....

“Frame any other bill that secures a fair, honest vote, to men of all parties, and carries out the pledge that the people shall be left free to decide on their domestic institutions for themselves, and I will go with you with pleasure, and with all the energy I may possess.  But if this Constitution is to be forced down our throats, in violation of the fundamental principle of free government, under a mode of submission that is a mockery and insult, I will resist it to the last.  I have no fear of any party associations being severed.  I should regret any social or political estrangement, even temporarily; but if it must be, if I can not act with you and preserve my faith and my honor, I will stand on the great principle of popular sovereignty, which declares the right of all people to be left perfectly free to form and regulate their domestic institutions in their own way.  I will follow that principle wherever its logical consequences may take me, and I will endeavor to defend it against assault from any and all quarters.  No mortal man shall be responsible for my action but myself.  By my action I will compromit no man."[637]

The speech made a profound impression.  No one could mistake its import.  The correspondent of the New York Tribune was right in thinking that it “marked an important era in our political history."[638] Douglas had broken with the dominant pro-slavery faction of his party.  How far he would carry his party with him, remained to be seen.  But that a battle royal was imminent, was believed on all sides.  “The struggle of Douglas with the slave-power will be a magnificent spectacle to witness,” wrote one who had hitherto evinced little admiration for the author of the Kansas-Nebraska Act.[639]

Douglas kept himself well in hand throughout his speech.  His manner was at times defiant, but his language was restrained.  At no time did he disclose the pain which his rupture with the administration cost him, except in his closing words.  What he had to expect from the friends of the administration was immediately manifest.  Senator Bigler of Pennsylvania sprang to the defense of the President.  In an irritating tone he intimated that Douglas himself had changed his position on the question of submission, alluding to certain private conferences at Douglas’s house; but as though bound by a pledge of secrecy, Bigler refrained from making the charge in so many words.  Douglas, thoroughly aroused, at once absolved, him from any pledges, and demanded to know when they